Patna High Court
MD. NAZAMversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, directing his release on bail with specified conditions.
Summary
Md. Nazam was named in a complaint alleging an attempt to rape a 15‑year‑old girl on 27 July 2019, with the complaint filed on 30 July 2019 and later linked to a criminal case (C.R. No.64 of 2019) involving offences under the IPC and POCSO Act. The petitioner filed an anticipatory bail petition in 2022, contending that the complaint was false, unsupported by an affidavit, and motivated by a prior family dispute, citing the ratio in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh. The State opposed bail, asserting the specificity of the allegations against the petitioner. The court observed the lack of an affidavit, the existence of a prior case filed by the victim’s father, and the possibility of a false complaint, and therefore ordered the petitioner’s release on bail. The bail was conditioned on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with the provisions of CrPC Section 438(2) and BNSS Section 482(2).
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner given the allegations of attempted rape and related offences?
- Does the absence of an affidavit supporting the complaint affect the merit of the bail application?
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 354, 363, 366A, 376, 511
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- attempted rape
- POCSO
- false complaint
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Penal Code
- BNSS
- Covid‑19 procedural accommodation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.152 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2019 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Madhubani
======================================================
Md. Nazam, Son of Md. Ahmad, Resident of Village - Narayanpatti, P.S. -
Rajnagar, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pravin Khatoon, Daughter of Md. Ahmad, Resident of Narayanpatti, P.S. -
Rajnagar, District - Madhubani.
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratanakar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 27-01-2026 During covid-19 pendamic period physical copy of
the petition was not being filed in the registry, in view of
undertaking of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
that he undertakes to file a hard copy of the entire petition
within ten days before the registry, accordingly, the defects
pointed out by the office are ignored for the present.
2. The present anticipatory bail petition is pending
since 2022.
3. The accused/petitioner is named in the complaint
and apprehending his arrest in connection with C.R. Case
No.64 of 2019 in which cognizance has been taken for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.152 of 2022(5) dt.27-01-2026
2/4
offences punishable 341, 323, 354, 376, 511 of the Indian
Penal Code as well as Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
4. As per complaint petition, the petitioner alleged
to made an attempt to commit rape upon complainant aged
about 15 years on 27.07.2019 at about 4.30 p.m. while she
was alone in her home.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
petitioner that for the occurrence dated 27.07.2019, the
present complaint was lodged on 30.07.2019, where the
contents of complaint not appears supported on affidavit by
completely ignoring the legal ratio as available through
Priyanka Srivastava vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
[(2015) 6 SCC 287]. It is submitted that due to local
village related issues and differences, the present false
complaint case was lodged. In support of his submission,
learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court that prior to
lodging this complaint by informant/victim herself, her father
lodged a police case against petitioner, which was lodged as
Rajnagar P.S. Case No.403 of 2018 registered under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.152 of 2022(5) dt.27-01-2026
3/4
Sections 363 and 366A read with 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, with general and omnibus allegation.
5. Learned APP for the State while opposing the
prayer of bail submitted that the allegation is specific against
this petitioner.
6. Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, learned counsel
appearing for complainant/O.P. No.2 failed to join the
present proceeding on repeated calls.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as prima facie the allegation raised
through complaint without affidavit in support, as discussed
aforesaid, coupled with the fact that the petitioner appears in
litigating terms with father of the informant much prior to this
occurrence, as discussed aforesaid, accordingly, the
petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks
from today, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.152 of 2022(5) dt.27-01-2026
4/4
(POCSO), Madhubani in connection with C.R. Case No.64 of
2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short
‘CrPC’)/under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…